.jpg)
THE Minister of Amerindian Affairs and former President Bharrat Jagdeo distributed freehold titles, called transports under our system, and lease titles to some of the Amerindian communities which they said has created history, and was the first time Amerindians have been given such a document through the ministry for land they occupied for centuries. However, the Village Council of Isseneru is calling for the Amerindian Act 2006, to be amended after a recent court ruling allowed a miner to proceed with mining activities on title lands belonging to the villagers. The minister told the recipients (Toshaos) that the government is in the process of identifying more communities where lease and freehold titles will be given. The minister also told the Toshaos at the handing over ceremony that she had found a disorganised situation with regard to demarcation and the processing of titles when they assumed office, but had been working to regularize the situation.
The Amerindians and their organisations should look at a more progressive programme of land tenure because they have to be armed with more secured land titles and leases which they do not have, and are denied the opportunity of so many things in the 2006 Act, including the right and liberty for their development, the right of inheritance of the mineral on their lands.
Many communities had been occupying land for many years without any proof of possession and no effort is being made to give them title. The Toshaos of these outstanding communities recognise that surveys were often needed which caused delays in the demarcation process.
The traditional justification for issuing freehold and leases is that it enables the state to insert conditions for protection of the villages. Freehold titles seem the right option as the Amerindians have already established their bona fides. I believe this will create an impetus for protection and development that Amerindians now lack. However, in this regard, we must draw a distinction between freehold titles and leasehold titles; an amendment to the Amerindian Act 2006 is needed.
The Amerindians and their organisations should look at a more progressive programme of land tenure because they have to be armed with more secured land titles and leases which they do not have, and are denied the opportunity of so many things in the 2006 Act, including the right and liberty for their development, the right of inheritance of the mineral on their lands.
Many communities had been occupying land for many years without any proof of possession and no effort is being made to give them title. The Toshaos of these outstanding communities recognise that surveys were often needed which caused delays in the demarcation process.
The traditional justification for issuing freehold and leases is that it enables the state to insert conditions for protection of the villages. Freehold titles seem the right option as the Amerindians have already established their bona fides. I believe this will create an impetus for protection and development that Amerindians now lack. However, in this regard, we must draw a distinction between freehold titles and leasehold titles; an amendment to the Amerindian Act 2006 is needed.
